User talk:Boghog

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:BogBot)
Jump to: navigation, search

Variability in PSA Measurement[edit]

I have edited it just because it is a very common problem occuring in practice. The review artcile may not be upto date but it is addressed considering routine problem of clinicains and lab professionals.

Hippocampus[edit]

Your edits introduced multiple "Vancouver style errors" - perhaps something has changed in the cite templates. Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 12:26, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

@Materialscientist: Those are not errors. See Help:CS1_errors#vancouver and discussion. Right now, any author name that contains a diacritical mark is flagged as an error. The consensus is that should not be marked as error. Trappist the monk will fix. Unfortunately it may be several weeks before the fix in Module:Citation/CS1 is rolled out. Boghog (talk) 12:32, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Right now there are 683 pages with these Category:CS1 errors: Vancouver style errors. These will go away once Module:Citation/CS1 is updated. Boghog (talk) 12:36, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure you'll see on WP:MCB, but I thought I'd ask personally here too. Given how excellent the enzyme FAR was, it'd be great to have your help in overhauling the gene article a bit. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 10:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

The gene article[edit]

I'm sure you'll see on WP:MCB, but I thought I'd ask personally here too. Given how excellent the enzyme FAR was, it'd be great to have your help in overhauling the gene article a bit. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 10:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited PDE6B, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CGMP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited NAD(P)H dehydrogenase (quinone 1), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NQO2 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Reference Edits in Sandbox[edit]

I would like to inform you that it was not the wrong pmid number. Rather, the Pubmed Central number was listed, which I double checked and is correct. I will be watching any further edits carefully. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silverfox369 (talkcontribs) 20:17, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree that the PMC IDs were correct. The problem is that the PMC IDs were copied into |pmid=. PMC ≠ PMID. The script that I used to reformat the citations assumes that the PMIDs were correct, but this in case they were incorrect. Boghog (talk) 20:33, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Re-added PMC links[edit]

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silverfox369 (talkcontribs) 20:23, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Troponin C type 1, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ventricular (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:38, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

I am not[edit]

…going to rekindle old conflagrations by deeply engaging you on the question you left at my talk page. This once, I'd reply that the content moved to footnote in the article in question was all there before I arrived, was moved to the footnote so that it could be retained and not deleted, was corrected for the same reason, and was tagged as it was to make clear that someone had said those things (that were in the original content), and that that very someone needed to be identified. So, yes, I called attention to the shortcomings still present after the editing I had done. This, I have found for the most part, results in good longterm consequences for articles, at least with people who AGF with regard to my editing. Leprof 7272 (talk) 21:47, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Another article is yours. Goodbye. Leprof 7272 (talk) 21:52, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
@Leprof 7272: I have what I think are legitimate objections to your edits which I outlined on your talk page. I have now moved them to the article's talk page. If you disagree, please respond there. Boghog (talk) 21:57, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
@Leprof 7272: the content moved to footnote in the article in question was all there before I arrived. – False. You have tagged your own edits. @Leprof 7272: tagging own edits diff Boghog (talk) 22:19, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
As I explained, yes, I tagged my own edit, to call attention to the fact the bulk of that content—that discussing the component kinetics and thermodynamics governing ligand association—was moved from text to footnote, and was unsourced. It is one of my practices, that when an editor says something unsourced, to add a bit of text making clear that someone in some source somewhere had to have said what is being written in by the editor, and so a source is needed. The added bit of text I inserted, was to allow the [who?] tag to be added, to draw an editor in, to provide a source. As always, you have the wrong end of stick, and baby went out with the bath (mixing of metaphors intentional). Last word is yours, I am out. Leprof 7272 (talk) 22:41, 24 April 2015 (UTC)